SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 MarsdenLR 1789

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
ASIA GENERAL EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES SDN BHD & ORS – Appellant
Versus
MOHD SARI NUAR & ORS – Respondent


[1] This appeal involves limitation period to bring an action. For ease of reading, we shall refer to the parties as they were in the court of first instance. And to appreciate the questions posed to us, we shall begin with the facts.

Facts

[2] The plaintiffs were shareholders in a private limited company known as Steel Furniture Centre (Sabah) Sdn Bhd (the company). The name of the company was subsequently changed to Multi Industries (Sabah) Sdn Bhd.

[3] On 9 February 1983, the plaintiffs, the company and the 1 defendant entered into a loan agreement ("loan agreement") where the 1 defendant agreed to lend the company a sum of RM3 million free from all interest for a period of five years ("loan period"). This period ended on 31 December 1987. In consideration for this loan, the plaintiffs transferred their shareholdings ("plaintiffs' shares") in the company, as well as the management of the company, to the 1 defendant, its nominee or nominees. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants were nominees of the 1 defendant. This loan to the company was intended to repay Sabah Bank Bhd ("the bank"), which had granted financial facilities to the company for which the plaintiffs were the guarantors. Dur

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top